Robert Haas:
> And the result is that I've got like five people, some of whom
> particulated in those discussions, showing up to say "hey, we don't
> need the ability to set defaults." Well, if that's the case, then why
> did we have hundreds and hundreds of emails within the last 12 months
> arguing about which way it should work?
For me: "Needed" as in "required". I don't think we *require* defaults
to make this useful, just as David said as well. Personally, I don't
need defaults either, at least I didn't have a use-case for it, yet. I'm
not objecting to introduce defaults, but I do object to *how* they were
introduced in your patch set, so far. It just wasn't consistent with the
other stuff that already exists.
Best,
Wolfgang
